Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

provisioning: Prevent re-provisioning #94

Merged

Conversation

david-hazi-arm
Copy link
Contributor

After successful provisioning, the code writes a pattern into the ITS, which could be checked on the next boot.

Description

Test Steps

Checklist:

  • I have tested my changes. No regression in existing tests.
  • I have modified and/or added unit-tests to cover the code changes in this Pull Request.

Related Issue

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@david-hazi-arm david-hazi-arm requested a review from a team as a code owner September 27, 2024 10:54
urutva
urutva previously approved these changes Sep 27, 2024
Copy link
Member

@jasonpcarroll jasonpcarroll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine - minor comments.


if( status != PSA_SUCCESS )
/* FIXME: Magic value */
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this comment going to be addressed? I see it in each main.c.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removed the comment, we will fix this issue in the upcoming PRs.


if( status != PSA_SUCCESS )
{
return 0;
Copy link
Member

@jasonpcarroll jasonpcarroll Sep 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor comment - I notice in calls to this function you check if it returns "false" and not 0. Should this function return "false" and "true" ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

aggarg
aggarg previously approved these changes Sep 30, 2024
After successful provisioning, the code writes a pattern
into the ITS, which could be checked on the next boot.

Signed-off-by: Dávid Házi <[email protected]>
@david-hazi-arm david-hazi-arm dismissed stale reviews from aggarg and urutva via 1740690 October 8, 2024 18:35
@david-hazi-arm david-hazi-arm force-pushed the dev/davhaz01/provisioning_fix branch from f7de2ad to 1740690 Compare October 8, 2024 18:35
@urutva
Copy link
Contributor

urutva commented Oct 8, 2024

@jasonpcarroll Can you please re-review? Thanks

@jasonpcarroll
Copy link
Member

@david-hazi-arm @urutva approved

@rawalexe rawalexe merged commit f27b98e into FreeRTOS:main Oct 9, 2024
16 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants